Meet the candidates for Oakland City Attorney (2024)

After 13 years of service, Oakland City Attorney Barbara Parker is calling it quits. That means voters have a chance to select a new top lawyer for the city.

The City Attorney leads an office of about 80 people who help draft city contracts, defend the city against lawsuits, advise elected officials, and sue people who break Oakland’s ordinances. The city attorney also appoints a member of the Public Ethics Commission and performs other legal duties. As an elected position, the city attorney has a lot of independence.

The city attorney doesn’t get a lot of limelight compared to City Council or the mayor. But this role has a lot of power and their decisions have big impacts on the lives of residents.

Two people are vying to succeed Parker: Ryan Richardson, chief assistant city attorney, and Brenda Harbin-Forte, a former Alameda County Superior Court judge.

They represent very different choices for voters.

Harbin-Forte served as a judge for the Alameda County Superior Court from 1998 until her retirement in 2019. She was also an Oakland Police Commissioner, appointed by Libby Schaaf in 2020. Prior to her service on the bench, Harbin-Forte worked as a partner and associate at private law firms where she handled civil litigation and criminal defense. She clerked for the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Harbin-Forte received her law degree from UC Berkeley Law School. Until recently, Harbin-Forte was also the leader of the recall campaign against Mayor Sheng Thao.

“I’m running for city attorney because the city attorney’s job is an important job in Oakland — much more important than people realize,” Harbin-Forte told The Oaklandside in an interview. “And I’m also running because I think Oakland needs a new direction, and that new direction has to include the Oakland City Attorney’s Office, in terms of changing some of their policies.”

Richardson has worked in the City Attorney’s Office since 2014. As chief assistant city attorney, he helps manage the office and guide the work of its many lawyers. He previously served as an analyst for the city’s Equal Employment Office where he investigated complaints about discrimination and harassment. Before this, Richardson ran his own law firm handling employment cases, and before that, he was an associate at a big law firm called Jones Day. Richardson received his law degree from the University of Southern California.

“I’m running because I love this work, I love this office, and I care about my clients, meaning the City Council, the mayor’s office, department heads, and I care about the city,” Richardson said. “I woke up one morning, literally, and had the realization that if I stand by and watch the office fall into the wrong hands, and move backward or fall into disarray, I probably would never forgive myself.”

Harbin-Forte and Richardson share some goals for the office. For example, both support the work being done by the affirmative litigation unit, which files lawsuits against companies that pollute in Oakland, landlords who abuse tenants, and employers who steal wages, among other things.

But they differ on some big issues, such as how the city attorney should approach the Negotiated Settlement Agreement, a two-decade-old deal Oakland agreed to, which maps out how the city’s police department should be reformed so that officers no longer violate people’s constitutional rights.

The city attorney is a nonpartisan position and past political campaigns for the office have been relatively mellow in tone compared to the races for City Council or mayor, which can get rancorous. This year might be different.

Harbin-Forte has clashed repeatedly with the city attorney’s office, including with Richardson. She was affiliated with a group of former police commissioners who unsuccessfully sued the city to prevent the appointment of new commissioners. She also filed an ethics complaint against a city councilmember. And as the leader of the recall campaign against Mayor Sheng Thao, Harbin-Forte issued scathing critiques of Thao and other Oakland leaders. The recall campaign’s financial operations have also come under scrutiny: the city’s Public Ethics Commission filed a lawsuit against the campaign earlier this summer after Harbin-Forte and others refused to hand over records that investigators tried to subpoena and alleged the ethics commission was politically motivated.

Richardson was the only candidate in the race for almost a year until Harbin-Forte announced her candidacy in July. In recent weeks, Richardson and Harbin-Forte have made sharp jabs at each other. According to the East Bay Times, Richardson told supporters in an email that his opponent is supported by “some of the most reactionary voices in Oakland.”

Harbin-Forte has attacked Richardson’s credentials and character and questioned his popularity. In an email she said Richardson exhibits “incompetency and poor judgment.”

Harbin-Forte has also criticized The Oaklandside. She agreed to be interviewed for this article and answered follow-up questions by email. But just months ago, she refused to speak to us about the recall campaign, writing in response to an interview request in March that she felt The Oaklandside was biased and our reporting was propaganda and “an affront to the essence of the First Amendment.”

Important responsibilities and qualifications

Richardson and Harbin-Forte are largely in agreement that the city attorney’s main job is providing good legal advice to city officials.

Harbin-Forte said her 45 years of legal experience qualify her for the job. She has tried and managed cases, including complex multi-party matters, and has handled municipal legal cases. As a judge, she handled criminal, civil, and administrative cases. She also worked as a presiding judge overseeing other judges.

She described herself as well-respected on the bench and that people were “amazed” by her skills at settling cases. As city attorney, she would make sure people in the office feel heard and she would educate herself on what’s working and what needs improvement.

“I just bring much more experience to the office than anyone else in this race,” Harbin-Forte said.

Richardson, who has 11 years of experience in municipal law, said he routinely handles matters related to government transparency laws like the Brown Act and California Public Records Act, the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, which lays out the rules for collective bargaining for city employees, Oakland’s City Charter, the Oakland Planning Code, and the City Council’s rules of procedure, among other complex legal areas. He said he also understands how to run a modern law office and retain talent and that’s why he has the endorsement of the union chapter that represents the lawyers in the City Attorney’s Office.

Richardson added that he has the right temperament for the job, which involves building trust with the city officials who are essentially his clients.

“If they don’t trust you and come to you in the first place, or they come to you but don’t trust what you’re saying, or worse yet, if the city attorney instead of building bridges has built walls and has a partisan or factional approach to things, the office can’t be effective,” Richardson said.

The candidates have similar ideas about how they would run the office, which includes general practices, such as making sure staff feel heard. However, Harbin-Forte said she would end remote work and make sure people are working in the office every day. She suggested that Richardson’s concerns about losing attorneys to competitors are irrelevant because “nobody is going to leave a government job with pension and other benefits to go to the private sector.”

“Ryan Richardson doesn’t think we should expect city attorneys to work every day,” Harbin-Forte said. “He said at a public forum that we shouldn’t expect them to come to work because there are not enough coffee pots or coffee machines on every floor at the City Attorney’s Office, and the city attorneys have to go to another floor to get a cup of coffee and that’s inconvenient and we shouldn’t expect them to do it.”

Richardson said Harbin-Forte’s recollection of what he said is wrong. The office operates in a larger legal marketplace, he said, and the city will lose talent to law firms or other cities if they end the hybrid remote work option. He added that he agreed that it benefits the office and staff when everyone comes to the office, but the way to get there is through incentives.

“I gave the example that I recently pushed to install Keurig machines on each floor, and that staff responded really well to that relatively small investment,” Richardson said.

Office costs, judgments, settlements

The City Attorney’s Office relies on outside lawyers to handle some cases. According to the most recent annual report from 2022-2023, the city spent $7.65 million on fees to outside counsel. This was a big drop from the previous year, but on average costs have been rising.

Transparency and accountability

Alongside the Public Ethics Commission, the city attorney plays a major role in guaranteeing government transparency and accountability. That includes making sure meetings are accessible to the public; letting people request and review government records; and ensuring elected officials don’t break the law.

Harbin-Forte said she would make sure the public knows how much money the city is spending on outside counsel because “that should not be a secret.”

The city attorney already reports how much money is being spent on outside counsel each year, but Harbin-Forte said the reports don’t highlight all the big cases. As an example, she said the latest report didn’t include information about how much the litigation over the coal terminal has cost the city. (The latest report does include this information — $650,000 during the fiscal year 2022-2023.)

“I would invite the public to the table to help us set policy,” Harbin-Forte said. “To help us even in terms of pursuing litigation, so that they can bring in their concerns.”

Harbin-Forte said many people have already told her that they will give her two months on the job, and then they’re coming to tell her what the office needs to change. She added that being accountable to the public means being honest, but also not showing favoritism or being a bully.

Richardson said he would make sure all Oakland officials abide by the California Public Records Act, which requires the city to hand over records within 10 days when anyone asks to obtain copies. Richardson said he took the lead in getting the city to review, redact, and publish police personnel records that Oakland must release per state laws. Oakland doesn’t have a great record complying with the law around disclosing public records. The city has been sued several times over the past few years for ignoring its duty to hand over documents. [Editor’s note: The Oaklandside’s news editor Darwin BondGraham also sued Oakland over its failure to hand over police misconduct records.]

The Brown Act, which requires City Council and other boards and commissions to hold meetings in public, is another law Richardson said he would prioritize, as well as Oakland’s Sunshine Ordinance, which spells out even more transparency rules. He said the city attorney should help the City Council update and revise the Sunshine ordinance, which hasn’t been done in many years.

“When folks can access city government and understand it, we all get better outcomes,” Richardson said. “There’s less likelihood for any kind of shady dealings or self-dealings, but more importantly, we benefit from the collective thinking of the community.”

Oakland police oversight

Oakland’s police department has been watched over by a federal court-appointed monitor for over two decades. The monitor’s job is to ensure OPD is complying with the terms of a 2000 lawsuit filed by over 100 Black men who were beaten up and had drugs planted on them.

Throughout this period, OPD has repeatedly violated the settlement terms. Multiple scandals — brutalizing protesters, strip-searching Black men, high numbers of questionable fatal shootings, the sexual exploitation of a minor, and more — have prolonged the department’s oversight. OPD has gotten close to regaining independence in recent years, but earlier this month a federal judge criticized the department’s leadership for backsliding on reforms and ordered significant internal restructuring. The city attorney represents the city, including its police department, in this matter.

Harbin-Forte said she believes the city attorney has not fought hard enough on behalf of the police department in this case, and that there should be “more aggressive” advocacy on behalf of the police and for ending federal court oversight of the police department, which is sometimes referred to as the NSA, shorthand for the “negotiated settlement agreement.” The NSA is a court enforced settlement that spells out the reforms OPD must complete before it regains independence.

She said there are civilian oversight bodies — including the Oakland Police Commission, Office of Inspector General, and the Community Police Review Agency — that can take over monitoring of the department. There will always be issues with the department that continued federal oversight won’t prevent, she said.

“What I have seen is an improvement in the police monitoring themselves, and themselves trying to weed out the bad actors,” Harbin-Forte said, adding that she had personal experience on the bench dealing with police who lied in her courtroom. “I know there can be and there are some bad actors in the police department, but it has dramatically improved, and I don’t think we can afford to have oversight for the next 20 years.”

Richardson said Oakland is closer than ever to ending OPD’s federal oversight thanks to its officers and their commitment to reducing racial disparities in policing.

“But the court remains concerned with the department’s handling of a string of investigations involving a racist Instagram account, an officer-involved hit and run, and alleged witness bribery,” Richardson said. “We won’t end the NSA by going to court and trying to downplay the remaining issues. We’ll end it by fixing them.”

Richardson added that it’s generally dangerous to go into a courtroom and assume the judge “doesn’t get” the matter in front of them.

Harbin-Forte said she knows how to talk to judges and that they appreciate cogent arguments “that they can’t get around.” She added that the federal judge overseeing Oakland’s monitorship, William Orrick, “even he recognizes that at some point this oversight has to end.”

However, Harbin-Forte agreed the incident involving the officer who allegedly bribed a witness to secure two murder convictions was “terrible.”

Police commission conflicts

There is no love lost between Harbin-Forte and Richardson and much of that stems from their interactions through the Oakland Police Commission. This volunteer body provides oversight of Oakland’s police department.

Harbin-Forte, who served on the commission from 2020 until last year, said the city attorney ignored recommendations she and other commissioners provided concerning the NSA.

“We wanted the City Attorney’s Office to raise issues, bring them up with the judge, including the central conflicts of interest on the part of the federal monitor,” Harbin-Forte said. “The City Attorney’s Office would not do that.”

Harbin-Forte was referring to the fact that the federal monitor appointed by the court, a company called Robert Warshaw & Associates, is paid to provide monitoring services. Harbin-Forte and some other prominent Oaklanders, including former police chief LeRonne Armstrong, believe Warshaw is inventing reasons to prolong oversight to enrich himself.

Harbin-Forte made similar claims about Jim Chanin, a civil rights attorney who led a panel that selected new members of the police commission. Chanin is also one of the two attorneys who filed the 2000 lawsuit that led to OPD’s federal oversight. A handful of commissioners sued the city last year arguing that Chanin should have been barred from serving on the panel, arguing he had a financial conflict of interest. Harbin-Forte participated in the lawsuit by representing the plaintiffs when they appealed a ruling in the case. She also shared a press release on behalf of the commissioners after Chanin was removed from the selection panel.

A superior court judge rejected the lawsuit’s request to halt the panel’s process for selecting new commissioners. A subsequent appeal by Harbin-Forte and others was also rejected.

Richardson said the case ended in a settlement where Oakland paid no money, admitted no wrongdoing, and all the selection panel’s decisions remained intact.

We asked Harbin-Forte for the legal basis for arguing that Warshaw and Chanin have a financial conflict of interest. She said, “much like one does not need a weatherman to tell you it’s raining outside,” one could follow the money and see a conflict of interest.

Chanin previously told the Oaklandside that he thinks Harbin-Forte’s allegations are “ludicrous” and that he worked for nearly a decade helping to reform OPD, earning only “minimal pay.” What he was able to do before OPD was under court oversight — frequently sue OPD for brutalizing people — was far more lucrative.

Harbin-Forte also said Warshaw is prohibited from serving as a monitor in two jurisdictions simultaneously. She cited guidelines published by the U.S. Department of Justice in 2021 that recommended individuals who are employed as the lead monitor for one police agency should not lead monitoring efforts of another city also. The 2021 guidelines state that recommendations should only be applied to future monitorships — not existing ones. Warshaw was appointed OPD’s monitor in 2010 and he’s also served as the monitor of police departments in Arizona and Michigan. The guidelines also apply only to police reform efforts led by the U.S. Justice Department. Oakland’s police reform case isn’t led by the Justice Department. It was initiated by private attorneys representing people abused by OPD.

Harbin-Forte said she thinks Richardson got in the way of the Police Commission when it was trying to do its job. She accused Richardson and the City Attorney’s Office of failing to notify the commission that then-Police Chief LeRonne Armstrong was under investigation by an outside law firm. Harbin-Forte also said Richardson “threatened” the former head of the Oakland Police Commission in the immediate aftermath of Mayor Sheng Thao firing Armstrong.

Asked about these claims, Harbin-Forte shared a statement written by Tyfahra Milele, the former Police Commission chair, that outlined a conversation she claims to have had with Richardson after Thao fired Armstrong.

According to the statement, the pair argued about whether the commission should have been consulted or informed ahead of Armstrong’s termination. Milele claimed that Richardson told her the commission was overstepping its boundaries by asking for this.

“He warned that this disagreement should not be played out in the media and that if the commission continued on its current path, the city might redirect funding from the Police Commission to the Office of the Inspector General and the Community Police Review Agency,” Milele said in her statement.

Richardson declined to recount any conversations he had with Milele when she was on the commission, noting that those discussions were in his capacity as a member of the city attorney’s team and therefore he can’t disclose what he said. He said that any advice he provided would have been for the entire commission, not to her personally.

But Richardson did say that Harbin-Forte and Milele’s stories don’t match up and he doesn’t think Harbin-Forte’s allegation makes sense.

“I obviously don’t have the power to take away funding from any city department, office or program,” Richardson said. “I never have and never would say that.”

The mayor and city council set the budget for each of Oakland’s departments, including the police commission.

Elections

Oakland’s City Clerk and the Alameda County Registrar of Voters manage elections and the Public Ethics Commission has the job of ensuring candidates play by the rules. But the City Attorney has some important roles to play in this process, such as vetting the language used in ballot measures and defending the city from litigation arising from election disputes.

Elections are another place where the candidates draw big contrasts between each other.

Harbin-Forte claims that the City Attorney’s Office has repeatedly failed in its duties around ensuring fair elections. She accused the office — and specifically Richardson — of failing to enforce a deadline during the 2022 election by letting Sheng Thao, then a councilmember, file her mayoral candidacy papers late, and by initially refusing to let Alyssa Victory get on the ballot because of issues with her paperwork.

“That should never have happened,” Harbin-Forte said, calling them unforced errors. “I pride myself on being fair to everyone, and if you do that, if you have bright line rules, and set bright line expectations, you avoid a lot of future problems.”

Richardson said Harbin-Forte “is either misunderstanding or mischaracterizing the role of the city attorney” in relation to elections.

“The office does not decide who can or cannot file election paperwork, much less who has or has not qualified for the ballot,” Richardson said. “Second, any of Sheng Thao’s opponents could have sued the City Clerk to try to prevent Thao from being on the ballot. They did not. Finally, a lawsuit was filed after the election, and the court did not find that Thao should have been left off the ballot.”

Richardson said that Harbin-Forte’s statements about Alyssa Victory are incorrect.

“Again, our office does not make the initial determinations about who has qualified to be on the ballot,” Richardson said. “Second, Ms. Victory never filed a lawsuit. I personally called Ms. Victory to understand her objection, and then I worked with her and the clerk’s office to resolve the matter, and get Ms. Victory on the ballot, without Ms. Victory having to file a lawsuit.”

Victory did not file a lawsuit but did file a complaint with the California Secretary of State regarding the city clerk’s decision.

Harbin-Forte also criticized the City Attorney’s Office for legal issues raised by two recent ballot measures. She cited the city’s legal battle over Measure AA, a proposed parcel tax from 2018. When it was placed on the ballot, the city attorney and election authorities decided at the time that voters needed to know it would require a two-thirds vote to pass because it was a special tax. It got 62%, less than two-thirds. However, the City Council decided it had passed and certified it. The council based its decision on a change in the law after a court ruled that measures put on the ballot as voter initiatives only need a majority to win.

Opponents sued, arguing that it lacked the two-thirds needed and Measure AA was tied up in litigation for several years.

Harbin-Forte also brought up Measure NN, a parcel tax to be considered by voters this November, which would raise money for police, fire, and violence prevention services in Oakland. She said the city attorney got the ballot measure language wrong, and the City Clerk had to sue the Alameda County Registrar of Voters and the City Attorney’s Office over this mistake.

“Even if it passes there are going to be issues,” Harbin-Forte said. “Those kinds of things should not be happening.”

Richardson said the ballot materials for Measure AA were written at a time when the law was unsettled as to whether special taxes placed on the ballot by voter initiative required a two-thirds vote to pass or a simple majority. An appellate court sided with the City Council’s decision to certify the law.

Richardson said Measure NN had a typographical error in the materials that the office caught and fixed. He said no one sued over this issue, but the city had to get permission from the court to amend the mistake.

Big differences on the mayoral recall

Until recently, Harbin-Forte was the leader of the recall campaign against Mayor Sheng Thao, working alongside the controversial activist Seneca Scott, and Sam Singer, a public relations professional who represents the Oakland police officers union and former Chief Armstrong. Harbin-Forte’s sister Gail now leads that campaign, but Harbin-Forte said she still supports the recall.

However, Harbin-Forte said she would have no issues providing legal advice to Thao, assuming she survives the recall.

“I am a professional and I will do my job,” Harbin-Forte said, adding that she will treat not just the mayor but other city officials equally. “I have no questions and no concerns about that at all.”

Richardson has not taken a public position on either the mayoral recall or the one targeting District Attorney Pamela Price. He said that under the City Charter, the city attorney is not supposed to campaign for or against any other elected official in Oakland.

“Voters deserve to know their city attorney doesn’t play favorites or choose sides, and doesn’t have an enemies list, and is going to work with anybody who’s been duly elected,” Richardson said. “Consistent with that, folks who are running for city attorney need to uphold that same standard, and that’s what I’ve decided to do in my campaign.”

Harbin-Forte claims that Richardson did take a stance on the recall election by telling attendees at a recent forum that the city needs to do something about recalls because they’re getting out of hand. She also said that recalls are part of the democratic process and that there’s no legal basis for arguing that this should bar her from running for city attorney.

“Is he saying that in 2023, when I was on the Police Commission, I should have known that I might run for City Attorney in 2024, so I should not have done things that I felt were the right things to do?” Harbin-Forte said. “Is he saying that in January 2024, when I initiated the mayor’s recall, I should have known that I might file to run for city attorney in July 2024, so I should not have started the constitutionally and factually proper recall?

Richardson said it’s perfectly legal for Harbin-Forte to run a recall campaign, but he argued that this isn’t behavior consistent with being the head of a “nonpartisan bridge-building office.” Richardson added that Harbin-Forte mischaracterized his statements at the recent forum.

“I said I believe we, as residents and taxpayers, need to be wary of recalls becoming a normal and expected part of our elections, because they can be disruptive and they can lead to a cascade of special elections that can be expensive,” Richardson said.

Who is backing Harbin-Forte and Richardson?

Broadly speaking, Richardson has the endorsement of Oakland’s government. According to his campaign website, Richardson has been endorsed by current City Attorney Barbara Parker as well as prior city attorneys John Russo and Jayne Williams. He’s also endorsed by Mayor Sheng Thao and the three previous mayors, Libby Schaaf, Jean Quan, and Elihu Harris. The entire City Council also supports Richardson. And he’s been endorsed by the Alameda County Democratic Party, the East Bay Stonewall Democratic Club, the John George Democratic Club, the Oakland Tenants Union, and the Wellstone Democratic Renewal Club, among others.

Richardson is also the choice of most of Oakland’s major unions and labor groups, including the Alameda Labor Council, the Building and Trades Council of Alameda County, Oakland’s firefighters union, SEIU Local 1021, IFPTE Local 21, and IBEW Local 595.

“My track record proves that I’m going to work with those people because that’s what I do,” said Richardson. “I play well with others. I can’t say the same of my opponent.”

According to her campaign website, Harbin-Forte has been endorsed by some of the people working to remove the mayor and place new faces in Oakland’s government. Among her endorsers is Empower Oakland, an organization established by former Councilmember Loren Taylor that is pushing a slate of candidates in each of Oakland’s political races.

Harbin-Forte has also been endorsed by former mayor Elihu Harris, former councilmember Loren Taylor, former Police Commission Chair Tyfahra Milele, former state senator Holly Mitchell, and Brenda Grisham, who is helping lead the recall against District Attorney Pamela Price.

Several prominent African American leaders have also lined up behind Harbin-Forte, including Cynthia Adams, the head of the Oakland branch of the NAACP, Bishop Robert Jackson of Acts Full Gospel Church, and Elias Ferran, who ran for City Attorney in 2020. And Harbin-Forte has been endorsed by several former judges, including Joan Neblett, LaDoris Hazzard Cordell, and Evelio Grillo.

Oakland’s police union and the International Longshore and Warehouse Union Northern California District Council are also supporting Harbin-Forte. And she has been endorsed by SOS Oakland, a political committee established by lobbyist Greg McConnell, whose clients include Insight Terminal Solutions, a company that wants to build and operate a coal export terminal in West Oakland, and Argent Materials, a gravel supplier in East Oakland.

Harbin-Forte claims Richardson secured the vast majority of his endorsements before she entered the race, “so his endorsers had no other option.”

In an email to The Oaklandside about endorsements, Harbin-Forte wrote that Sheng Thao is “disgraced” and that former mayor Libby Schaaf is under investigation for numerous ethical violations.

Harbin-Forte also criticized Richardson for bringing up the ethics commission’s investigation of the Thao recall campaign. Richardson didn’t mention the investigation during our interview and we didn’t ask her about it.

Harbin-Forte claimed that Richardson drafted “unconstitutional” subpoenas that were sent to two organizations being used to run the recall campaign. Harbin-Forte also alleged that Richardson and the mayor “weaponized” the ethics commission.

The commission, however, is independent of the mayor and city attorney. The mayor and city attorney each only get to appoint one member of the seven-person commission. Thao has not appointed a member to the commission. The commissioners make hiring decisions for staff, including investigators. And the commission’s investigators are civil servants protected from political interference. The last two budgets proposed by Sheng Thao have also cut resources from the commission and failed to make new investments, weakening its ability to open cases like the one into the recall campaign.

“As City Attorney, I will not participate with public agencies as they abuse their authorities and bully and intimidate individuals or entities who have valid grounds for objecting to governmental actions,” Harbin-Forte said.

Correction: A previous version of this story incorrectly characterized the nature of Harbin-Forte’s participation in a lawsuit filed by several police commissioners against the city. She was not a plaintiff in the suit. Rather, she was an attorney representing the plaintiffs when they appealed a ruling. She also served as a media spokesperson for the plaintiffs.